2019
DOI: 10.1177/1043659619832078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preferences for Feeding Tube Use and Their Determinants Among Cognitively Intact Nursing Home Residents in Wuhan, China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract: Introduction: Standard advance care planning practice is yet to be established in Mainland, China, and little is known about feeding tube preferences among Chinese nursing home residents. The purpose of the study was to examine preferences for feeding tube use and its predictors among frail and cognitively competent nursing home residents in Wuhan, China. Method: A cross-sectional sample of 682 nursing home residents were interviewed face-to-face using a structured questionnaire from 2012 to 2014. Results: A t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of the 15 observational quantitative studies, five [38][39][40]45,47] were conducted in North America, seven [27,[32][33][34][35][36]44] in Europe and three [28,31,43] in Asia. The studies were performed between 1992 and 2020 and mostly in an outpatient setting.…”
Section: Key Characteristics Of the Included Studies And Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Of the 15 observational quantitative studies, five [38][39][40]45,47] were conducted in North America, seven [27,[32][33][34][35][36]44] in Europe and three [28,31,43] in Asia. The studies were performed between 1992 and 2020 and mostly in an outpatient setting.…”
Section: Key Characteristics Of the Included Studies And Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only quantitative non-randomized study [29] had low RoB. The quality of the 15 quantitative descriptive studies [27,28,[31][32][33][34][35][36][38][39][40][43][44][45]47] varied, with eleven studies [27,[31][32][33][34][35][36][38][39][40]44] scoring high because of a high participant non-response bias, three studies [31,40,44] not providing enough information to assess representativeness, and one study [31] not providing enough information to assess whether the employed measurements were appropriate. The three mixed methods studies [26,30,42] also scored low.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Within Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations